November 3, 2008
A Different Kind of Unity
As the country collectively gets ready to point a gun barrel into the roof of its mouth and pull the trigger, it’s interesting to reflect that for most of the two years that Barack Obama has been running for president, his main theme is that he is the kind of guy who can bring us all together in love and unity.
Increasingly it is becoming clear that the Obama formula for unity is to silence those who disagree with him as much as possible -- or else to make sure that those on a soapbox aren’t able to shout their messages very far.
It never was particularly believable to begin with, given that roughly half of the country is going to object to a straight socialistic program that isn’t really different in any signficant degree from the left-wing programs that the Demcoratic party has been banging the drum on for many decades.
It’s just that this time, the country as a whole is allowing its deep disgust with the Republicans to translate into turning over the reins to what will, at best, be an extremely liberal program.
There’s certainly going to be as many people on the right objecting to Obama’s left-wing program as there were vocal left-wingers who objected to George W. Bush’s programs. Remember, Bush was supposed to be the president who was going to bring us together and be bipartisan.
Or going back even farther in history, here’s a statement that Richard Nixon made right after his 1968 win over Hubert Humphrey: “I saw many signs in this campaign. Some of them were not friendly. Some were very friendly. But the one that touched me the most was -- a teenager held up the sign ‘bring us together.’ And that will be the great objective of this administration, at the outset, to bring the American people together.”
Bring us together might acquire a similar meaning under Obama. Bring us together -- forcefully, might be more what we’re talking about. Kind of makes you wonder what Obama is thinking when he calls for a “civilian national security force,” as he did in a recent speech.
Now, that could be something perfectly innocuous, like a beefed up CERT force, funded with federal dollars and ready to help with emergencies like Hurricane Katrina; but it does set the suspicious mind ruminating.
I’m not one of those people who, when Bill Clinton was president, predicted darkly, “when it comes time for his term to end, he’ll find some excuse not to have an election,” because I know that our republic is strong enough that if a president were fruity enough to try that, he would not be obeyed.
When Congress returns to do its work under the new president, it will be interesting to see just how many of the liberals in the chamber will be true to the liberal tradition of supporting freedom of speech.
Conservatives expect -- because liberals have been pretty open about it, that there will be a strong attempt to bring back the Orwellian “fairness doctrine,” which is about as fair as infanticide is “pro life.” The purpose of regulating the airwaves in this way is to return all major media to their proper orientation, i.e. towards the Left.
Talk radio will not go quietly into that good night. And given that talk radio hosts helped orchestrate the defeat of “comprehensive immigration reform” last year, the Democrats may wish that they had done something less painful, such as stepped naked into a nest of rattlesnakes.
Still, if they have the 60 seat majority in the senate, they may be able to force it through.
That wouldn’t shut down Rush Limbaugh and company, although it might force them into exile on Satellite and Internet radio.
Once again, is a battle of this kind what Obama has in mind when he talks about bringing us all together in unity and brotherhood?
This willingness to trash freedom of expression isn’t confined to the leaders of the Democratic party. The rank and file, when polled are quite comfortable with it, especially when it is pointed out that a reimposition of the doctrine will drive shows like Limbaugh and Sean Hannity off the air.
“Bring it on!” the Left seems to be saying.
Hatched by Dave Ross on this day, November 3, 2008, at the time of 7:00 AM
TrackBack URL for this hissing: http://biglizards.net/mt3.36/earendiltrack.cgi/3317
The following hissed in response by: Michael Babbitt
Dave, you are so right. I think that for a lot of conservatives Barack Obama at first appeared as a very nice albeit naive liberal whou wanted us to all get along. We liked him as a person but didn't like his policies. Unfortunately, he has shown himself to be a Leftist ideologue who will do or say anything, playing off the race card, and leveraging white guilt. I now find him a detestable character, which is a sad place to end up in this election cycle and in this time in American history. He clearly has skillfully coopted the language of the Democrats in order to sell his radical agenda. I think he is a Saul Alinsky radical in all that it implies. Conservatives need to band together now and after the election -- no matter what the results -- to fight this Leftist poison.
The following hissed in response by: Xpressions
Well Obama won with 52 percent and the liberal illuminati are said to unite the country. When Bush won with 51 percent he divided it. Guess 1 percent is a big difference these days.
Post a comment
Thanks for hissing in, . Now you can slither in with a comment, o wise. (sign out)(If you haven't hissed a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Hang loose; don't shed your skin!)
© 2005-2009 by Dafydd ab Hugh - All Rights Reserved